On June 18, Chris McDonough wrote:
And Guido, for zdctl.
Will Zope use zdctl?
It would be cool to have the same framework used to control individual
instances (Zope or ZEO), and zopectl can become an external zdaemon
instance manager (I'll call it z*ctl). Zope and ZEO simply provide
start
On Friday 20 June 2003 01:19 am, Jean Jordaan wrote:
There's only one possible way! A-A-P! (A good match for Ape, Shane ;)
It's a replacement for make by Bram Moolenaar, the author of Vim, and
it looks like it does a lot of things Right.
Sorry, I haven't really been paying attention so
On Friday 20 June 2003 04:57 pm, PieterB wrote:
On Friday 20 June 2003 01:19 am, Jean Jordaan wrote:
There's only one possible way! A-A-P! (A good match for Ape, Shane ;)
It's a replacement for make by Bram Moolenaar, the author of Vim, and
it looks like it does a lot of things Right.
It *sounds* like it's being suggested that we replace make
That's correct, though Aap can usefully do much more than make,
such as fetching remote sources and managing CVS checkouts/-ins.
Has anyone used SCons? http://www.scons.org/
Well, they feature neck-and-neck in July, so if someone (or
I think the default Zope install should not have dependencies other
than that Python is required and the user has some shell system
(bash/sh/MS batchfiles).
... and aap apparently ;)
I'm thinking that ZC needs a more capable make replacement. That
isn't quite the topic of this thread, but Aap
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 10:59:29AM -0400, Chris McDonough wrote:
So, in any case, given that the ZC source tarball installer will not
attempt to manage multiple instances (we'll leave that to Luca) here are
the requirements I've gathered so far:
- Add a --doc flag to configure
- Add a
On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 03:38:53PM +1000, Adrian van den Dries wrote:
Well, as we all know, shell scripting kinda blows. There is no way that
I know of to portably use an array in shell, and I wanted to eventually
make it possible to use something other than bash to run the configure
On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 08:57:34AM +0200, PieterB wrote:
On the other hand some packages (such as my zopetest, or other
rpm-alike things), may require other things. I like A-A-P, because
I think that would make my installerfiles much cleaner. Aap has
integrated support to fail if a program
The last few days I've been working on patch to Zope 2 that will clean
up the textarea size preference handling in the ZMI. Right now, its a
mess. I kept running into this really irritating behavior such that,
when ever I'd go to pull something out of a request object, it'd end
up being found in
Hi,
I'm sorry to revisit an problem that I see has been discussed to death
last month, but I'd like to propose a change to what has currently been
checked in about Ordered Folders into Zope 2.7.
What I often want is an easy way to migrate existing sites to the
ordered version. So I would
Hi Florent!
Florent Guillaume wrote:
I'm sorry to revisit an problem that I see has been discussed to death
last month, but I'd like to propose a change to what has currently been
checked in about Ordered Folders into Zope 2.7.
No problem. Welcome to the discussion :)
FYI, this is what Brian
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 01:38, Adrian van den Dries wrote:
You may be interested in Kenneth Almquist's ash (aka dash in Debian):
Optimally the configure script will work in any bourne-shell-derived
shell (e.g. the bourne shell on Solaris).
With the distutils, ``--home`` is version-agnostic
Yuppie wrote:
Florent Guillaume wrote:
I'm sorry to revisit an problem that I see has been discussed to death
last month, but I'd like to propose a change to what has currently
been checked in about Ordered Folders into Zope 2.7.
No problem. Welcome to the discussion :)
FYI, this is what
Jean Jordaan wrote:
It *sounds* like it's being suggested that we replace make
That's correct, though Aap can usefully do much more than make,
such as fetching remote sources and managing CVS checkouts/-ins.
This is the kind of thing I'm interested in. I don't need a make
replacement, I need
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 02:10, Adrian van den Dries wrote:
On June 18, Chris McDonough wrote:
And Guido, for zdctl.
Will Zope use zdctl?
Zope does use zdctl. It's what gets invoked when you run zopectl. I
need to degeneralize the zdctl invoked by Zope a bit in order to support
zopectl debug
I have the need to update some persistent objects in a ZODB to change
their class.
One use case comparable to the one I have would be to change all objects
of type Folder to OrderedFolder.
To do that, I envisionned finding all thoses objects and doing
ob.__class__ = OrderedFolder
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 03:55, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
Am I missing anything?
I'd like to have the possibility to install any architecture dependant files
in an different tree.
I'm afraid I'll need to understand more about what debian considers
architecture dependent. Can you
Florent Guillaume wrote:
I have the need to update some persistent objects in a ZODB to change
their class.
One use case comparable to the one I have would be to change all objects
of type Folder to OrderedFolder.
To do that, I envisionned finding all thoses objects and doing
ob.__class__ =
On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 10:58:54AM -0400, Chris McDonough wrote:
I'm afraid I'll need to understand more about what debian considers
architecture dependent. Can you provide details about what this
means?
[There is nothing special about Debian and architecture dependent files]
Dependent is
On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 03:07:18AM -0700, Jamie Heilman wrote:
Anyway, it was a learning experience for me, but I'm not convinced
this isn't a bug. What do you think?
From the POV of a poor web monkey, my opinion is that this is
purely awful. It's the kind of thing that can easily waste hours
On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 04:56:26PM +0200, Florent Guillaume wrote:
I have the need to update some persistent objects in a ZODB to change
their class.
One use case comparable to the one I have would be to change all objects
of type Folder to OrderedFolder.
To do that, I envisionned finding
OK, thanks, I thought this was it. In Zope's case, this just implies
compiled Python libraries. This can normally be specified via the
--platlib flat to setup.py, but as described in a prior message in this
thread, the Zope setup.py overrides platlib in order to provide
X-platform compatibility
hi
i had downloaded leave.zexp from the following url
http://www.openflow.it/EN/Download/index_html
I have installded open flow 1.1.0
i have plone,zope on ,my linux box.
Now i tried to rewrite the application using zpt +
formulator(originally written in dtml).
I have written the following zpt
On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 04:56:26PM +0200, Florent Guillaume wrote:
| I have the need to update some persistent objects in a ZODB to change
| their class.
|
| One use case comparable to the one I have would be to change all objects
| of type Folder to OrderedFolder.
| To do that, I envisionned
Sidnei da Silva wrote:
You need something like this:
http://cvs.zope.org/Products/ZopeOrg-NV/Extensions/change_modules.py?rev=1.2cvsroot=Zope.orgcontent-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
Thanks, I see there is indeed some deep voodoo involved...
Florent
--
Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo (Paris, France)
Jamie Heilman wrote:
[major snippage]
Hmmm, that means that this changes break exactly these applications,
which, in order to be on the secure side, explicitly use
REQUEST.form['bla'] more than once in a request, right.
Ironic.
cheers,
oliver
___
Jamie Heilman wrote at 2003-6-20 03:07 -0700:
...
That magical promotion of the key value to the other dictionary is
what tripped me up. This technique, while originally used only for
known convenience variables like URLx or BASEx and for promoting lazy
data, now applies to all
Florent Guillaume wrote at 2003-6-20 16:56 +0200:
I have the need to update some persistent objects in a ZODB to change
their class.
One use case comparable to the one I have would be to change all objects
of type Folder to OrderedFolder.
To do that, I envisionned finding all thoses
Oliver Bleutgen wrote:
Jamie Heilman wrote:
[major snippage]
Hmmm, that means that this changes break exactly these applications,
which, in order to be on the secure side, explicitly use
REQUEST.form['bla'] more than once in a request, right.
Naw, it doesn't break them, promotion doesn't
Dieter Maurer wrote:
Zope promotes the variables from cookies and form to other
at least since Zope 2.1.6 (the first version I worked with).
I think this is for efficiency reasons. You have a single
dictionary lookup instead of three (other, form, cookie).
Yeah most promotion is for
On June 20, Jamie Heilman wrote:
and I don't like surprises
Zope 2 is probably not the most suitable choice, then. ;-)
More seriously, though, my colleagues and I will often find a few of
these sorts of *surprising* things in Zope 2 every week. It's really
quite demoralising building for Zope
I'll quote the (seemingly late) Andrew Kenneth Milton wrt Zope 2:
http://www.zope.org/Members/mcdonc/Silly/newzopelogo
;-)
On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 20:35, Adrian van den Dries wrote:
On June 20, Jamie Heilman wrote:
and I don't like surprises
Zope 2 is probably not the most suitable choice,
32 matches
Mail list logo
